Comparative Efficacy of Deep Brain Stimulation to the Globus Pallidus Internus Versus the Subthalamic Nucleus in Parkinson's Disease.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In recent years, the incidence of Parkinson's disease has gradually increased, and the application of dopamine drugs has been limited, so there is an urgent need to explore a more effective treatment method to treat Parkinson's disease effectively treated. Subthalamic nucleus-deep brain stimulation and globus pallidus internus-deep brain Subthalamic nucleus-deep brain stimulation and globus pallidus internus-deep brain stimulation are the two treatments for Parkinson's disease. However, there is no clear conclusion as to which of these two methods is more effective. Primary Study Objective: To compare the effects of deep brain stimulation in the globus pallidus internus and deep brain stimulation in the subthalamic nucleus combined with drugs for Parkinson's disease, respectively. Methods: In order to compare the motor function, neurological function, and activities of daily living scores, the incidence of fluctuations in isokinetic and motor symptoms, changes in medication doses, and the incidence of complications between the two groups, 52 patients treated with globus pallidus internus-deep brain stimulation and 52 patients treated with subthalamic nucleus-deep brain stimulation were included. Primary Outcome Measures: Using the Motor Function Examination scale of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, patients' motor function was evaluated prior to surgery, one month after surgery, three months after surgery, and six months following surgery. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, the Mini-mental State Examination, and the Activity of Daily Living scale were used to evaluate patients' cognitive function before and three months after surgery. The patient's dose of medication and complications were also counted, among other things. Results: The Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale-Ⅲ scores decreased, and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Mini-mental State Examination, and Activity of Daily Living scales increased in both groups after surgery, with no difference between the two groups (P > .05). Between the two groups, there was no difference in the frequency of allodynia and motor symptom variations (P > .05). Postoperatively, the Group globus pallidus internus experienced lower medication doses and a reduced incidence of complications than the Group subthalamic nucleus (P < .05). Conclusion: The effects of GPi-DBS and STN-DBS in treating PD are both more significant and there is no difference between them, but GPi-DBS reduces complications and medication dose, and has a higher safety profile, indicating that GPi-DBS is more suitable for clinical application and promotion. Future studies need to further explore the mechanism behind the reduction of complications and medication dose of GPi-DBS in Parkinson's disease, in order to provide better support for the clinical application of GPi-DBS.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".